I get what you're saying. Trimming may produce ammunition that may be capable of more precision under certain conditions...like using a machine rest. What I'm saying is that A. Once a person gets behind the gun the person is now the biggest factor, and B. All that effort will have been for almost no real gain as a result.

I don't doubt that you've experienced better precision after uniforming your brass and while shooting your gun from a machine rest. But its just a waste of time for what you'll gain, IMO.

But those are two different factors. Better ammo makes for better shooting. A better shooter makes for better shooting. Both together is even better.

__________________
Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.

But those are two different factors. Better ammo makes for better shooting. A better shooter makes for better shooting. Both together is even better.

Unless you are more precise than your ammo, the difference wont be worth the amount of time your spent trimming all your cases. Having ammo capable of 2" groups at 50 yards doesn't mean you can actually shoot those groups. Its like having a gun that is capable of those groups...unless you have the ability to shoot with that sort of precision, you'll receive very little payoff, if any, from the added efforts.

Go to a match some time and take a poll of how many competitive shooters trim their pistol brass.

I get what you're saying. Trimming may produce ammunition that may be capable of more precision under certain conditions...like using a machine rest. What I'm saying is that A. Once a person gets behind the gun the person is now the biggest factor, and B. All that effort will have been for almost no real gain as a result.

I don't doubt that you've experienced better precision after uniforming your brass and while shooting your gun from a machine rest. But its just a waste of time for what you'll gain, IMO.

Tons of people shoot in competitions/matches, however most of us are "not them" and don't mind a stray round or two if we are reloading at 1/3-1/2 the price of retail (so 1/2-2/3 more ammo for the same price).

Mostly quality, Major QTY.

__________________
"That's what governments are for - get in a man's way." - Captain Malcolm 'Mal' Reynolds

Tons of people shoot in competitions/matches, however most of us are "not them" and don't mind a stray round or two if we are reloading at 1/3-1/2 the price of retail (so 1/2-2/3 more ammo for the same price).

Mostly quality, Major QTY.

That's basically what I'm saying. I really don't see how taking the extra time to trim all that brass is worth it to people who aren't even as accurate as their own equipment (which is nearly every shooter).

Unless you are more precise than your ammo, the difference wont be worth the amount of time your spent trimming all your cases. Having ammo capable of 2" groups at 50 yards doesn't mean you can actually shoot those groups. Its like having a gun that is capable of those groups...unless you have the ability to shoot with that sort of precision, you'll receive very little payoff, if any, from the added efforts.

Go to a match some time and take a poll of how many competitive shooters trim their pistol brass.

There are several issues which go into intentionally placing a particular round in a particular spot.

Imagine a flashlight beam coming out of the muzzle of your gun, like a cone. Of course you have to keep the beam on the target. That's all about fundamentals. On the other hand, you would want as small a beam as possible once you realize that having the beam on the target isn't going to get the round on target... instead it's the area within which your bullet can randomly land.

I would much rather have a very small area in which my bullet can randomly land than a larger one. Pistols, unless they're in a rest, won't make a difference. That's why I don't bother trimming. In a benched rifle, on the other hand, will make a difference. For me, even a fifth of an inch at 100yds makes a difference. Will trimming the brass (changing the pressure, and therefore likely the height of the shot placement) for that purpose make a difference? Absolutely. I won't be going without brass trimming in the future.

And... when it comes down to it... prepping brass is part of the fun of reloading. I won't be doing it in pistol, but I'll always do it (even for plinking) for rifle.

So.. I think we're agreeing... we're just talking about two different things. I'm answering the OP's third item about it making a difference in rifle shooting. You seem to be sticking more with the pistol aspect.

__________________
Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.

I would much rather have a very small area in which my bullet can randomly land than a larger one. Pistols, unless they're in a rest, won't make a difference. That's why I don't bother trimming. In a benched rifle, on the other hand, will make a difference. For me, even a fifth of an inch at 100yds makes a difference. Will trimming the brass (changing the pressure, and therefore likely the height of the shot placement) for that purpose make a difference? Absolutely. I won't be going without brass trimming in the future.

And... when it comes down to it... prepping brass is part of the fun of reloading. I won't be doing it in pistol, but I'll always do it (even for plinking) for rifle.

So.. I think we're agreeing... we're just talking about two different things. I'm answering the OP's third item about it making a difference in rifle shooting. You seem to be sticking more with the pistol aspect.

We do agree. I was only referring to the trimming of pistol brass. Rifle is a completely different matter.

Unless you're shooting MOA with your handgun, there is no point. There may be one or two people who can do it, like that fellow that popped the balloon with his revolver from 600 yards. He clearly is an expert shot and did this to demonstrate that Elmer Keith's famed 600-yard deer shot was actually possible. Elmer himself was another rare individual who might've been able to do MOA with a handgun.

But most people are not Elmer. Even Jerry Miculek, as great as he is, would have trouble matching that particular feat. Not saying he couldn't. But even he'd have to severely work at it. So, I view trimming handgun brass as a total waste of time.

By contrast, doing 1/2 MOA with a rifle is plausible after a year or two of regular, and frequent, practice. Say you're practicing 3 times a week with your rifle at various distances. I would expect you'd be able to do 1/2 MOA pretty easily with a typical Remington 700, Savage, Mauser, or Mosin (all in good shape, of course) and a good handload.

Also bear in mind that typical rifle cases stretch considerably more than handgun cases. Even .44M cases with repeated full-house loads will typically split before they stretch too far. Maybe .460 S&W Magnum, due to its length, is a special-case scenario (no pun intended). But none of my .357M or .44M cases have ever required it.

^^ This, straight-wall pistol cases don't stretch so trimming is not needed for semi-auto cartridge ammo. I have loaded both one batch and mixed batch pistol cases (9x19, 9x21 and .38 super) and crimp is not effected, no die changes needed. In fact, you really aren't crimping on a straight-wall pistol case used in semi-autos, all you are doing is removing the case mouth belling added to seat the bullet easily. This is done using a taper crimp die and that is very insensitive to small case length changes.

If you are roll crimping for rimmed pistol cases like .38 special, .357M and .44M, then you do want case length uniformity and trimming may help some here. I only use one batch cases for my .44M loading and don't need to trim as length is too close to matter.

That's basically what I'm saying. I really don't see how taking the extra time to trim all that brass is worth it to people who aren't even as accurate as their own equipment (which is nearly every shooter).

I'd rather save that time to load/shoot more.

Well... You know, it could be that spending time on ammo provides a confidence boost? Self-fulfilling prophecy and all that?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

__________________
Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.

I have Rem 222 cases with an easy 15+ reloads (35-45g bullets running hot) and I have alot of 223 cases sized down to 222 with 8+ reload on top of how ever many times it was reloaded as 223.
Some cases are 50yrs old.

A couple of years ago I decided to see how many times I could reload a FC 9mm case. I went to the range, sat down with two Lee hand presses and my Little Dandy powder measure. I used a Hornady 147 XTP because its boat-tail base eliminated the expanding and crimping steps. I only sized, primed, charged and seated. The load was 3.7 grs of 231. I quit at 35 reloads. I still have the case.

Rifle vs handgun brass isn't the issue. Bottle necked brass vs straight walled is. Of course, tapered brass like 300 carbine needs to be trimmed just like all bottle necked brass. Trimming isn't just about precision. It is also about SAFETY. Anyone who thinks it is not worth trimming bottle necked handgun brass because they can't shoot 1moa with the handgun is a danger to themself and everyone around them. There are plenty of handguns chambered in bottle necked cartridges which could blow up in the shooter's face if the brass is out of spec.